Last year, I gave a talk about books as mirrors and windows. Some of you may have heard it. There was much more to it than just this, but to summarize briefly, I expressed that there is a need within the Charlotte Mason community for our children to have more books that reflect the diversity of our society. Both living and lifegiving books. I also laid out the issue at hand: There is a shortage of living chapter books featuring Black people and characters who are not in the midst of “the struggle.”

I know that part of this is because struggle has been an authentic part of the African American story from the beginning, but it’s not all of it. There is more to our story, and I want our collective children, of all backgrounds, to understand that we are more than tragedy and strife. There’s even more to our story than overcoming and triumph. We have grandparents and pets. We have hobbies and passions. We have favorite recipes and funny family stories. We enjoy adventures and wandering. We have dreams and coming-of-age drama. We are multidimensional with modern and contemporary experiences that transcend enslavement and civil rights.

Not that the other stories shouldn’t be told. They are critically important and anyone who follows me here knows that I include many books on hard historical truths in my children’s lessons. All I’m saying is that kids need more stories about Black people than just those, and when it comes to those OTHER stories, there’s a shortage of living books.

While discussing a possible (imperfect) solution in my talk, I posed the question of whether it’s possible that we have defined living books too narrowly, and I also suggested that there may be room within the Charlotte Mason community for something I’ve called “lifegiving books.”

Following that talk, I received all sorts of feedback, most of it very supportive. But there were also those who felt that, with living books being the cornerstone of a true Charlotte Mason education, I was taking too much liberty with introducing another category of books and suggesting that it be embraced.

This talk that freed many and brought additional families into our homeschooling community was not the first time I’d spoken about lifegiving books. I’ve been talking about the need to diversify booklists for years. In fact, it was over three years ago, that I first wrote about lifegiving books on my website.

In the wake of George Floyd’s death, many of the things I’d written over the years, including this lifegiving books article, began to be circulated online and much like the Mirrors and Windows talk, most of the reactions were positive, but some of the chatter online was less so. Now recall that my premise is that it’s incredibly unhealthy for children to solely read about:

  • The lives of white fictional characters
  • The trials and contributions of white historic figures
  • The struggles and triumphs of the enslaved and formerly enslaved
  • Black characters who are fighting for civil rights or struggling through urban poverty with broken families and even more broken spirits
  • Poor, ignorant, or downtrodden Black families

After reading that premise, some moms within the Charlotte Mason community were so determined to prove me wrong and prevent even the mere possibility of rethinking our beloved booklists that they immediately began working to set the record straight. I’d like to share just one example of many with you today. After reading an article I’d written that was posted to social media, she commented:

“She [meaning me, Amber] is correct that a living book is a “life giving book.” As a CM expert, I can assure you that her interpretation of [a] living book is a tad bit off. Her conclusion is that a “life giving book” is different than a living book— no they are the same thing. I am. 100% positive that books such as Up from Slavery by Booker T Washington and the writings of Holtzclaw, DuBois, and Frederick Douglas are LIVING BOOKS! I Have read them and their literary quality is also excellent. Just because your typical CM program might not list them, doesn’t mean they aren’t living! I think she has limited her understanding of the definition for a living book. An excellent living book for 4-6 grade children is Esperanza Rising. It’s not twaddle. It’s life-giving and therefore it’s living. It’s written very well. Just because the sentence structure isn’t “high-level” British style, doesn’t meant it’s not living. To Kill a Mockingbird is another living book without eloquent sentences. Again, she’s limiting her understanding of what Mason means by “living.” She’s correct to say that a living book is “life-giving.” It saddens me that she didn’t understand this. I just think it’s important for people who write about CM to be sure they are properly representing her philosophy and her definitions. I think the author of this article is not actually using the full-context of Masons definitions for living books. Her definition is woven throughout all her volumes and you get a better sense of what a living book is if you read Mason’s writings rather that “definitions” and interpretations from other homeschool sources. The author of the article used homeschool sites to define “living books.” And therefore, she actually misrepresents Mason’s true meaning of a living book. We read Fifty Years by Johnson and compared it to EMANCIPATION SONG from The Anti-Slavery Harp: A Collection of Songs for Anti-Slavery Meetings compiled by William W. Brown, a fugitive slave. And then we studied the painting: A Ride for Liberty – Fugitive Slaves, March 2, 1862 by Eastman Johnson.”

Social media comment

Do you see the problem here?

The books that this “CM expert” offers as examples of why I’m wrong are MORE OF THE SAME. She actually makes my point for me because she goes on to fire off a list of wonderful living books about the EXACT thing that I said we need to expand beyond.  

Make no mistakes, there ARE living books featuring Black people who are enslaved (or formerly so), fighting for civil rights, and struggling in urban poverty, but once you leave the realm of picture books, the pickings are extraordinarily slim. Most of the stories that include additional facets of African American life are not written in the same literary style most of us use when defining living books.

I very much feel that the typical reading lists found in nearly every interpretation of a Charlotte Mason education need to be expanded to include people of color and that all of those diverse titles cannot be focused on oppression and struggle. The issue is that when you move beyond picture books, the selection of chapter books from which to choose is very limited if we want to uphold the same literary aesthetic that many of us have come to expect from books we deem “living.”

Given this, my options when speaking to the Charlotte Mason community are to say:

1. “We must expand our definition of living books to include books of a different literary quality because there are ideas held within them that our children must get. The “best available” books on certain topics or containing certain ideas are not all written in the same voice or style of most of the books that we’ve deemed ‘living.’”

In that case, I could argue that, as with all forms of art, literary beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What may look like mere eye-candy literature to a mom whose child is validated daily through the words and pictures of nearly every living book presented in the feast, could be a life-giving book to my brown-skinned babies. The mere existence of dust jackets featuring Black people is a breath of life blown into my household.

The mention of a familiar cultural experience or the knowing hum of a grandmother’s song is an acknowledgment that the Black experience is really a thing worth noting and loving. And the simplicity and comfort of reading about the real or imagined life of a child or adult with a story to tell who happens to be Black vs. a story about being Black is a critical element in the development of a creative mind space for boys and girls. In short, I could argue that what may be a living book to my family may not be one to yours, and so we should hold a looser interpretation of the term.

Read more on this topic from my friend, Erika at Charlotte Mason City Living: Who Decides Which Books are Living Anyway?

2. But because I actually don’t like to cause controversy, I decided not to mess with the preciously held interpretation of living books, and instead, I said, “OK, we are to rely on living books. But for this particular category, there aren’t enough living books so I think we need to include “lifegiving” books that don’t match the literary threshold but are vital nonetheless.”

But then, as evidenced by the commenter above, some “CM experts” were unhappy with that. As you can see, I’m stuck between a rock and a hard place.

So today, I want to ask that we not get tripped up on semantics. Whether you want to consider that we need to expand our definition of living books to include diverse titles that may be written differently than other books we deem living, or if you prefer to say that we need to include lifegiving books that are not quite living, the point remains the same:

It is time for us to expand beyond the status quo. We cannot continue to offer up white people, slaves, and oppressed Black people to our children and consider it a good education. We cannot, in good conscience, sacrifice what is right in order to worship living books and living things over living people.

I’ll be talking about this topic and more at the upcoming Charlotte Mason Institute 2021 Online Conference. I hope to see you there! In the meantime, you can find me on Instagram @heritagemomblog.